• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Does one believe in the death penalty?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    I would like the death penalty for all offences - motoring upwards. penalty should fit the crime so e.g. for motoring one would be made to pogo stick over the M25 at rush hour...

    I know clippy will agree with me even if no-one else will.
    The death penalty is not a revenue earner, infact it costs money. Now if they can sentence you to the gas chamber and you own a £1 million house with a small mortgage and a few tweaks of the inheritance tax laws (100% tax on death goes to HMG) then speeding could well become a capital punishment.
    Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

    Comment


      #22
      Some people deserve to die, rapists, axe murderers etc

      BUT guilt should be based solely on solid forensic evidence - not on any form of confession/statements - as people lie, Guildford 4 anybody?
      ‎"See, you think I give a tulip. Wrong. In fact, while you talk, I'm thinking; How can I give less of a tulip? That's why I look interested."

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
        Some people deserve to die, rapists, axe murderers etc

        BUT guilt should be based solely on solid forensic evidence - not on any form of confession/statements - as people lie, Guildford 4 anybody?
        Were they innocent...or could they not prove their guilt ?
        How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
          BUT guilt should be based solely on solid forensic evidence - not on any form of confession/statements - as people lie, Guildford 4 anybody?
          Please define solid forensic evidence, or even give one example of such a thing.
          Insanity: repeating the same actions, but expecting different results.
          threadeds website, and here's my blog.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by threaded View Post
            Please define solid forensic evidence, or even give one example of such a thing.
            1 in 6 billion DNA match.
            ‎"See, you think I give a tulip. Wrong. In fact, while you talk, I'm thinking; How can I give less of a tulip? That's why I look interested."

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by Troll View Post
              Were they innocent...or could they not prove their guilt ?
              The police beat confessions out of them, which was pretty much the only evidence against them. Something like 150 years between them IIRC.
              ‎"See, you think I give a tulip. Wrong. In fact, while you talk, I'm thinking; How can I give less of a tulip? That's why I look interested."

              Comment


                #27
                Yes, I believe in the death penalty. I believe it exists China and a number of other countries...

                Murder with intent, for personal gain. If someone dies while in the process of committing another crime - also murder. ( i.e. two burglars caught on property, one get's shot by the owner, other crim stands trial for murder ).

                Personal gain could have quite a wide definition. Including political/religious motives.
                Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

                Comment


                  #28
                  My views are that if anyone murdered any member of my immediate family then I would make it my life’s work to kill them.

                  I accept that in a civilised society due process should be used to confirm that the suspect is beyond reasonable doubt the guilty party.

                  Once proven then the sentence should be death, and in a civilised society the States method of execution would be a far more humane and quicker method than what I would have in mind
                  Last edited by Troll; 30 January 2008, 08:43.
                  How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by DiscoStu View Post
                    This takes us into a very grey area. Is this person more guilty than when there isn't high def video of them doing it? Why do they get a harsher penalty?
                    Well trying to say only use when proved beyond any doubt, not reasonable doubt any doubt.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      I give a thumbs up to the death penalty for Murder,etc - But only on the condition that it must be possible to 100% guarantee that they were in fact the guilty party and the intent was there.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X